Case-IH C 70 or Hürlimann XN-707?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Case-IH C 70: hydraulic flow. On features, the Hürlimann XN-707 is ahead on forward gears.
- The Case-IH C 70 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 74% (18.5 L/min / 4.9 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “the same stated configuration”. Measured figures are compared only with measured, claimed only with claimed, at the same test condition; differences within each figure’s tolerance are not called.
What decides it, question by question?
| Question | C 70 | XN-707 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 48.7 kW (65.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 48.71 kW (65.32 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | EvenEven on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call. |
| Which turns a litre of fuel into more work at the shaft? | — | — | No figureNo call on fuel efficiency at the shaft: no figure on record for the C 70 and the XN-707. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the C 70 and the XN-707. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 43.5 L/min (11.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 25.0 L/min (6.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | AheadThe Case-IH C 70 has 74% more hydraulic flow (18.5 L/min / 4.9 gpm) than the Hürlimann XN-707 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,350 kg (5,181 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 1,834 kg (4,043 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the C 70: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70”); the XN-707: lift through the full range at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,060 kg (6,746 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 2,455 kg (5,412 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH C 70 is 25% heavier (605 kg / 1,334 lb) than the Hürlimann XN-707 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 4,500 kg (9,921 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the XN-707. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 45Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | AheadThe Hürlimann XN-707 has 181% more forward gears (29 gears) than the Case-IH C 70 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the C 70 and the XN-707. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the C 70 and the XN-707. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707”; OECD test report 1822, 1999 | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1992–1997 | 1998–2003 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Hürlimann XN-707 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Case-IH C 70 has 74% more hydraulic flow (18.5 L/min / 4.9 gpm) than the Hürlimann XN-707 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH C 70 is 25% heavier (605 kg / 1,334 lb) than the Hürlimann XN-707 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Hürlimann XN-707 has 181% more forward gears (29 gears) than the Case-IH C 70 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Hürlimann XN-707 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the C 70: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH C70”); the XN-707: lift through the full range at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann XN 707”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources